dmb says: Thanks for playing along, Dan. I'm going to withhold comment and hope others take a shot at it to too. (Since Tuukka doesn't seem to understand the core concept of this game, you're the only one to participate so far.)
------------------------------------------------------------------ > > On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 10:37 PM, david buchanan <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > This might be fun but it's also a kind of experiment. I was reading a paper > > and saw many parallels to Pirsig, which wasn't very surprising because it's > > titled "Dewey's Zen". But I wonder if others read it the same way I do. In > > certain passages it seems like one could plug Pirsig's terms into the > > sentences and they'd still mean the same thing - almost exactly. Telling > > you more than that - like which terms I had in mind - it would ruin the > > experiment. How about if I just post a bit of it and let everyone take a > > shot at it? Maybe it would be fun to put in Pirsig's terms wherever you > > think they would fit. Take your pick or play with them all, but please be > > explicit enough to let me know if you're seeing the same thing that I'm > > seeing. > > Hi David > Been editing one of my books most of the evening... I love the > writing... the editing, not so much... but since I cannot afford to > pay someone to do it, it falls to me. Anyway, I thought I'd throw out > a few ideas to chew on... > > > > > > > ...experiences come whole, pervaded by unifying qualities that demarcate > > them within the flux of our lives. If we want to find meaning, or the basis > > for meaning, we must therefore start with the qualitative unity that Dewey > > describes. The demarcating pervasive quality is, at first, unanalyzed, but > > it is the basis for subsequent analysis, thought, and development. Thought > > starts from this experienced whole, and only then does it introduce > > distinctions that carry it forward as inquiry. > > Dan: > The author seems to be saying the same thing that RMP says when he > talks about Quality coming first, and how ideas arise from 'it'. The > qualifiers the author uses seem contradictory on the surface though it > is possible I'm not seeing things properly. > > > It is not wrong to say that we experience objects, properties, > > and relations, but it is wrong to say that these are primary in experience. > > What are primary are pervasive qualities of situations, within which we > > subsequently discriminate objects, properties, and relations. > > Dan: > See... the author subtly shifts here into saying these qualities are > pervasive and the demarcation only happens later. > > > > > Dewey took great pains to remind us that the primary locus of human > > experience is not atomistic sense impressions, but rather what he called a > > "situation," by which he meant, not just our physical setting, but the > > whole complex of physical, biological, social, and cultural conditions that > > constitute any given experience—experience taken in its fullest, deepest, > > richest, broadest sense. > > Dan: > A minor quibble here... in the MOQ, experience is synonymous with > Dynamic Quality. Static quality comes later... inorganic, biological, > social, intellectual. > > > > > Mind, on this view, is neither a willful creator of experience, nor is it a > > mere window to objective mind-independent reality. Mind is a functional > > aspect of experience that emerges when it becomes possible for us to share > > meanings, to inquire into the meaning of a situation, and to initiate > > action that transforms, or remakes, that situation. > > Dan: > To respond to Dynamic Quality, in other words... > > > > > > > The pervasive quality of a situation is not limited merely to sensible > > perception or motor interactions. Thinking is action, and so "acts of > > thought" also constitute situations that must have pervasive qualities. > > Even our best scientific thinking stems from the grasp of qualities. > > Dan: > "Acts of thought" are ideas? Is that what I'm understanding here? And > yes, the MOQ would seem to agree that ideas are as 'real' as inorganic > and biological patterns... they exist on different evolutionary > levels, however. > > > > > And perhaps my favorite.... > > > > The crux of Dewey's entire argument is that what we call > > thinking, or reasoning, or logical inference could not even exist without > > the felt qualities of situations: "The underlying unity of qualitativeness > > regulates pertinence or relevancy and force of every distinction and > > relation; it guides selection and rejection and the manner of utilization > > of all explicit terms." > > Dan: > I should think that in the MOQ, culture is the regulating force of > distinctions and relations... remember how Phaedrus read about the sun > flashing green before he actually looked up and 'saw' it? > > Thank you, > > Dan > > http://www.danglover.com > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org/md/archives.html Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
